Quote:
Originally Posted by lucknow
I have done loads of investigating into the subject and everything that I said is the absolute truth. It's you who obviously have a problem with anyone who would dare call this so called theory bunk. It insults everything that you believe in and have faith in and to reject it stirs up the anger in you. It's very difficult to have the "Faintest clue" about evolution as the theory is so fluid and changes constantly to accomodate new discoveries that disprove it. Many atheists reject it because it's so absurd, unfounded, and just plain wrong by any observed facts that are there for all to see.
|
Well, perhaps over the course of your long-tenured investigatory procedures you might have learned that we
do have your so called "links" sitting very nicely on the shelf - hundreds of them, in fact. Of course, due to your exemplary understanding of the subject at hand, you probably also realize that none of these "links" actually describe the theory of evolution
{sarcasm mine}. Rather, I'm sure that an amphibious-like fish with four legs, gills, fish scales, tetrapod rib bones, a 'mobile' tetrapod neck, tetrapod lungs, fins instead of toes, is not a "link" but rather a very amusing creature that has merely been looked upon as a "link" but in all actuality is probably thought to have died when Noah forgot to pick him up before
National Lampoon's Great Water Park Adventure.
Certainly, with your astounding and marvelous digestion of the theory of evolution, you'd also understand the predictive power of the theory of evolution in how the above fossil (as merely one example) was found. There's no doubt in my mind that you already know from your diligent research that the above fossil has a name so I should probably not waste my time in revealing it to you *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough* - but I'm sure you already knew that. Naturally, the discovery of *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough* was not just sheer accident but actually predicted by empirical scientific examination.
Let me put it this way... Remember in the Bible when Jesus told everyone he'd be back to sprinkle happiness and joy all across Smurfland? Well, that was kind of like a prediction. Of course, it's been two thousand years and Smurfland hasn't been graced with his presence but it's kind of a prediction nonetheless. Thus far, all evidence points to it being a not-so accurate prediction (but I'll give it to them - those Christians are a patient bunch).
Of course, the power of prediction the theory of evolution has had has actually been far more fruitful and revealing. You see, prior to the discovery of creatures like
Tiktaalik there were predictions that such a creature would be dug up. These predictions were initially held by Mr. Charles Darwin himself (certainly not one to claim to come back to Smurfland and sprinkle happiness and joy on all those who believed him) but further propagated by the scientific community as more and more evidence stacked up in his favor.
You see, once the "DNA-Triangulation" method became available, it actually became possible for us to look at the DNA "source code" of individual creatures and find out how long ago they branched from another relative creature. In other words, scientists were able to look at the DNA of modern day tetrapods and modern day fish and make a prediction that the two must have had a common ancestor way back whence. In other words, with any luck there should have been a creature in the fossil record that had
both tetrapod features as well as fish-like features. Of course, because of the sensitivity of the fossil record, whatever fossils might have existed to prove this true could very well have been damaged or never fossilized. However, for such a sea-land creature, fossilization probably had better odds due to the muddy and mucky environment it presumably lived in. You probably know all of this from your in-depth studies but I'm just reviewing it for educational purposes.
The next thing these magical scientists with their
Magic 8 Balls (
8 Balls meaning the scientific predictive power not the measurement of the grainy white powder you've obviously been snorting) needed to decide upon was which sedimentary layer of rock to look for this *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough*. In order to do that, they had to look at where the first tetrapods showed up in the fossil record and where all the lobe-finned fish stood in the fossil record. The difference between the two should have been the approximate age in which *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough* would be found. For reference, and I'm sure you already know this from your enormous research, the first tetrapods appeared roughly 363 million years ago and the last lobe-bearing fish (of that time) were around 380 million years ago. Thus, this "transitional" should be found in a layer of rock dated between 363 and 380 million years ago. Keep in mind, all this is being done with magic crystals and reading tea leaves so it makes it that much more empirical.
At first, the search didn't reveal much. I mean, it's pretty hard to have been pointed to a certain section of rock by magical power crystals and tea leaves to find such a creature. It took quite a few years, if I recall correctly. In fact, a lot of hope was diminished simply because of the fear that those fossils were simply gone by this point. Then, like Jesus riding a horse through the clouds, the prediction was met and *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough* was found. The examination of *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough* revealed
precisely what researchers had
predicted - a fish-like, tetrapod-like, "transitional" found in a layer of rock dated between 363 and 380-million years ago. This was even better than Jesus riding a horse through the clouds because it actually came true.
Certainly, you know the story of *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough* because of your vast research but it's one that always reminds me of the wonderful predictive power of scientific theories when they're actually true and accurate. An accurate scientific theory is a lot like a magical incantation when you think about. It shows the ability to predict the future and what better way to accurately assess a theory than by someone to have actually predicted it would happen? After all, if Jesus came riding a horse through the clouds (watch out for the horseturds below- such as your previous post), I'd say that'd be some pretty awesome predictive power. Nonetheless, at least within 150 years we've been able to dig up hundreds of specimens just like *cough*
Tiktaalik *cough* to prove the theory of evolution while still accurately predicting more and more fossils yet to be dug up out of the ground. There's a lot more to be said for that than a two-thousand year old religious masturbatory fantasy that has yet to occur. But, alas, you've probably thought about all of that when you were doing your extensive and qualitative research.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
